EU leaders are preparing for a difficult start to 2018 when heads of state weigh new measures to deal with illegal migration. But the European Commission and European Council leaders agree that they want to avoid putting migration proposals to a vote that could divide member states.

Disagreements over migration won’t go away: leaders made clear at the end of a two-day EU summit on Friday (15 December) that the issue will be prominent at the next three European Council meetings.

At the next summit in February, heads of state will discuss plans to carve out a new financial instrument aimed at decreasing the number of migrants who arrive in Europe illegally.

They will decide next year on reforming the Dublin regulation for asylum procedures and on whether to keep mandatory quotas for relocating refugees from Italy and Greece to other member states.

Council President Donald Tusk said on Friday that the leaders discussed how to create a new dedicated financial instrument that would be “a key priority in the multiannual financial framework”. He described their responses to his proposal as “univocally positive”.

The Commission will present proposals for the post-2020 multi-year EU budget next spring.

But Tusk admitted that striking a compromise will be tricky given divisions between the 28 heads of state of migration, and especially on mandatory quotas for relocating refugees.

He wants leaders to use a summit next June to make “the first decisions” on those reforms.

Finding consensus “appears very hard but we have to try our very best,” Tusk told reporters at a news conference. The heads of state will have another chance to weigh the proposals for migration reform at a summit in March.

Several leaders described their discussions over mandatory quotas on Thursday evening as contentious. Juncker said the group “controversially debated” Tusk’s proposal to reconsider the quota system.

The December summit was clouded by member states’ deep disagreement over quotas, which the Commission first proposed in 2015 to manage the rising number of migrants arriving in Italy and Greece.

EU leaders ended the first day of the end-of-year European Council summit with no sign of tensions thawing amid recent disagreements on migration, which have once again exposed divides between eastern members and ‘old Europe’.

Shortly before the summit began on Thursday, Tusk sent a letter to EU heads of state calling the system “ineffective” and divisive, and suggesting that leaders reconsider whether it works. EU Migration Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos then lashed out at Tusk and called his letter “anti-European”.

Several eastern European countries have sharply opposed the migration system. Last week, the Commission referred the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary to the European Court of Justice for ignoring quotas to relocate refugees.

But after Thursday’s discussions, several leaders expressed their disapproval of Tusk’s proposal.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said before leaving the Council headquarters early Friday morning, “I made it very clear that I’m not pleased with the simple statement that the rules we’ve put in place up until now don’t work.”

Germany took in more than 1 million refugees in 2015, at the peak of the migration crisis, and has advocated for keeping the quota system.

Tusk acknowledged on Friday afternoon that his letter was controversial. But he stuck to his guns.

“I didn’t change my mind,” Tusk said during a joint news conference with Juncker and Estonian Prime Minister Jüri Ratas, who is ending Estonia’s six-month presidency of the Council of the EU this month.

“The topic of mandatory quotas is for sure very important, but this is not the solution for the problem. And on the other hand, this is the most time-consuming issue or dimension when it comes to the migration debate and talks here in Brussels and other capitals,” Tusk added.

The European Council president has emphasised that his priority is introducing broader proposals on reforming the Dublin asylum rules.

“The most important goal is to keep Europe united in a set of effective actions or efforts to stop or reduce this illegal influx,” he said.

But leaders ended Friday’s meetings in clear disagreement over how to introduce those reforms. Juncker emphasised that he stands by the Commission’s system.

“I don’t understand how this could give rise to such emotion. I don’t know why we think that relocation could be a threat to civilisation in Europe. We’re talking about a total of 35,000 people,” Juncker told the news conference.

The Commission president tried to defuse tensions by making clear that he disagrees with Avramopoulos’ criticism of Tusk.

“Donald Tusk is not anti-European. He is a pro-European,” Juncker said.

The two presidents managed to agree on one aspect of the upcoming negotiations towards a June decision on migration reform. Both Tusk and Juncker said that they want to avoid putting the proposals to a vote that could pit member states against each other.

Juncker said that several heads of state suggested during Thursday evening’s dinner debate that they could vote by qualified majority to reach a decision. Juncker said he is not a fan of that option.

“To some extent it is always breaking the unity of member states,” he said.

Tusk, who will be in charge of trying to broker a compromise between the leaders, called qualified majority voting “an effective method”.

“But for sure qualified majority voting is not a synonym of solidarity. In politics, it’s quite the opposite,” he added.

“This is why for me, my first intention is to find a compromise, a consensus, among all 28. Because this is the best method to protect solidarity as the best kind of relations between our member states.”

The Commissioner for Migration Dimitris Avramopoulos described on Tuesday (12 December) European Council President Donald Tusk’s proposals on migration intended for the EU leaders’ summit later this week as “unacceptable” and “anti-European”.

EURACTIV's editorial content is independent from the views of our sponsors.

Media is a pillar of democracy – as long as it can function properly. Now more than ever we need unbiased, expert information on how and why the European Union functions. This information should not be behind a paywall, and we remain committed to providing our content for free.

We know our readers value our reporting. We know journalism that covers the EU in a clear, unbiased way is critical to the future of the European Union. And we know your support is critical for ensuring this independent and free journalism.

Don’t take the media sector for granted. It was already fragile before the coronavirus pandemic. And as people can’t meet, media companies have lost a major source of revenue: events. EURACTIV is supported by a mix of revenue streams including sponsorships, online advertising, EU-funded projects, and policy debates. All of these sources of revenue are impacted by the current crisis.

While media struggles, disinformation thrives. We are already seeing fearmongering, fake news about the EU response, and increased threats to freedom of the press.

For more than two decades we have provided free, independent, multilingual reporting on the European Union. We continue to believe in Europe, and we hope you do too.

Your financial support at this critical time will allow our network of newsrooms across Europe to continue their work when Europe needs it most.

Refugees/migrants both economic & those fleeing war have swept up through the Med & Balkan routes being initially absorbed by the southern EU countries and then being dispersed throughout the rest of Europe for relocation and the social benefits system of those host countries.

Poland has accepted over 1 million migrants from the Ukraine, who work and actively contribute to Polish society, who are able to integrate & assimilate, despite the two countries difficult history. The Ukrainians are there because their own country is at war and very poor.
Just like those countries the refugees/economic migrants have fled from Africa and the Middle East to other parts of Europe.
So I don’t really see the immigration argument against Poland, in a country of 38 million, 1 million Ukrainians is a lot.

The EU is an instrument of multicultural jihadism. Multiculturalism is a totalitarian ideology which seeks to destroy the diversity among nations, mainly because they hate to see homogeneously white societies. Why do they hate to see it?: because they are racists who believe that there is something inherently evil about native Europeans. Therefore they support (in no particular order) 1-woman choosing study/career over children, 2-gayness 3- interracial marriage, 4-mass (non-European) immigration, 5-toxic feminism, 6-anti(white) racism. ALL these factors contribute to the below replacement level white birthrate and are therefore genocidal in their intent.

Consensus to preserve solidarity. Yes but at the cost of the lowest common denominator?? We need ethical values in politics. Is it ethical to reject those who flee from war etc.? This is the crucial question. Not preserving Christian culture which divides Europe too. In the West secular society is the dominant. In the East, preserving Christian culture. What Christian culture? Christianity will not reject welcoming refugees and migrants. Cannot brush all Muslims and Islam as radical, jihadists. In any religion, there are extremists. What is most important is that whatever colour, religion, culture we come from, we are first of all humans. We must rise above the popular opinions, disputes etc. as politicians, opinion-makers, religious leaders etc anyone with intelligence to see the broader picture. Do not repeat the mistakes of human history that will lead to conflict, wars inspired by religious diferences, race etc..

That not all Muslims commit acts of violence is a false argument. Only a minority of minority of smokers develop lung cancer. So there is nothing wrong with smoking?

Every single person who has ‘radicalised’ would not have shapeshifted into a jihadist had he not been raised as a Muslim.

The problem is that many leftists don’t see Muslims first of all as humans, they see their Muslim identity as immutable as if it were a racial category. This prevents them from setting up programs of de-muslification. These people could just toss their idiotology into the garbage bin, you know.

Contribute to our reporting

The need for fast, accurate and balanced information is always important. We value EURACTIV's good, independent journalism and support this initiative

Mella Frewen, Director General of FoodDrinkEurope

EURACTIV plays a vital role in bringing Europe closer to its citizens. EURACTIV has long recognised that the story of Europe has to be told across the continent, and not just in Brussels. We need to support a truly European and informed debate.